Pages

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Flagrant Treason in Australia

It is getting close to election time in Australia and, like politicians the world over, the slime is rising to the top. Prime Minister Julia Gillard of the Australian Labor Party recently said, just days before Australians head to the polls, that she is a republican and it is her deepest wish that HM Queen Elizabeth II of Australia be the last Australian monarch. Yes, yes it is political controversialism that happens all the time, but it is nonetheless *outrageous*! To repeat, Miss Gillard is the PM, Her Majesty's Prime Minister for the Commonwealth of Australia. She, upon taking office as an MP, swore an oath that she would, "be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her heirs and successors according to law. So help me God!" How in the hell is she keeping her word when she embraces republicanism?! How is anyone who votes for her continued political career now anything less than a traitor to their sovereign and country? This is something few to no republics in the world would *ever* tolerate and something monarchies, back when they were more traditional and had a little righteous pride, would ever have tolerated either.

Of course, the Prime Traitor says she likes the Queen and wishes her a long life and is resigned to the fact that Australians would never become a republic while she remains on the throne. But, after Her Majesty's passing, the time would come to make Australia just another republic. Like THAT makes it better?! Sorry Miss Gillard, but the oath you swore did include the phrase, "Her heirs and successors". You might think that being the first female Prime Minister of Australia might have given Miss Gillard a little more appreciation for one of the longest-serving, most experienced and most globally respected women leaders of our time. But no, the liberal revolutionary ideology trumps all with these rats. And her pretended respect for the Queen is downright insulting. If she admits the Queen is much loved by the Australian people one would have to ask why she would deny the Prince of Wales and Prince William in turn the chance to earn that same affection from their Australian brethren? It is a lie from a leftist revolutionary republican of the most common variety.

Australia does not need a republic, it does not need another vote on the subject. What the country does need is some action taken to stop subversives from clawing their way into high office. Miss Gillard is a perfect example of the radical, revolutionary, republican foot soldier. She was secretary of the Socialist Forum, she fought to grant special status to people based on their race, gender and sexual orientation, has been an advocate for degrading the borders of Australia on immigration issues and has been radically pro-abortion. Go down the list of revolutionary republican leftists around the world and she has done everything one is supposed to do, going as radical as possible while still being able to remain in the socialist rather than Marxist camp. Readers here, of course, know that socialism is simple Marxism for slow learners. This woman has no business being PM, nor having any place in the government of the Commonwealth of Australia whatsoever. She is a traitor whose positions, on the monarchy and a number of other issues, would, if successful, mean nothing less than the death of Australia as we know it. This is treason -pure and simple.

I as an Australian I feel that Miss Gillard has gravely insulted Her Majesty, the Royal Family and the institution that they are a part of. But I felt it was only a matter of time before she announced her republican agenda as most Labor Party politicians are republican as are most of our politicians.

But you can understand why, Gillard through her campaign has virtually proven that she is a corrupt and lying politician who is decieving the public as to her real self. She has proclaimed half-way through the election that she was going to stop being the 'fake' Gillard and be the 'real' Gillard, but honestly I think there is no differance except now I call her the 'real fake' Gillard. She also has an environment policy where she believes in establishing a 'peoples assembly' to be a represenative of the people to decide the national strategy on climate change, but this plainly shows that the 'House of Representatives' doesn't really represent the voters but politicians interests.

Quite honestly, I despise Gillard as a person, she backstabbed her boss (the former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd) to get top office, but this is normal for politicians, proposes policies that proves that the Federal Parliament does not represent the voters interests but politicians interests, she admits that she is a fake trying to decieve the public so she can win, and now endorses the Politicians Republic of Australia!

Wow up until she expressed her undying devotion to "a" republic, I actually didn't mind her that much. One would think that, being from The UK, she would have some attatchment to the monarchy, but no - as you said "the liberal revolutionary ideology trumps all".

But in the grand scheme of things, Gillard's treasonous confession doesn't matter. Politicians can't enforce their will upon us - there has to be a referendum for a republic to happen, and the Australian people are neither interested nor in any way supportive of "a" Gillardian republic. We're probably even more opposed to a republic now than we were 11 years ago. I may actually welcome a referendum - it'll show republicans once and for all (or should it be twice and for all?) that Australians don't want their republic.

One problem. Didn't she skip the Oath like Rudd the Dudd? I know she skipped the mention of God as an Avowed Atheist.

In todays world we see the Politically Correct and Pro-Democracy Forces in this sort of Hypocracy all the time. This is why in Kenya Sharia Courts can have Legal Standing now, but if anyone proposed Church Courtsbe given the same rights it'd be "Theocracy" and we'd hear how seperation of Church and State are needed.

Gilliard is a Traitor but will get away wiht it. If an American Politician reused ot uphold the Constitution he'd be reviled, but it seems no big deal for this Atheist Socialist Traitor to step in and trash the Government she serves because she wants to "Modernise it".

I hadn't heard that but the very idea that anyone could "skip the oath" is unforgivable in itself. A comparison (or contrast) can be made with the USA. Politicians do undermine the Constitution all the time but, even the worst of these examples, would never, EVER say openly and in public that they wanted to tear it up and start over. It would be absolute political suicide -because most Americans are very proud of the Constitution, some going so far as to think it a divinely inspired sacred document. And that doesn't really bother me. A little righteous pride is a good thing. What I find frightening is the number of people in monarchies who do not feel the same way about their own form of government even when it has a longer history and a considerable record of success behind it.

She followed Kevin Rudd's example in omitting the reference to The Queen in her Prime Ministerial oath of office (whilst being sworn in by the Governor-General...), but she would have still had to have sworn allegiance to Her Majesty when she became a Member of Parliament - all MP's have to upon entering parliament I believe

It is certainly ridiculous but it is not shocking for me. Belgium has seen the prospect arise of having a government dominated by people who want to destroy the country and are quite proud for that. It is like giving the keys to your home to an arsonist.

I didn't know if the PM took a special oath of office or not, I was only going by the oath all those elected to parliament are expected to take. In my book to avoid or omit any part of an oath of office should disqualify one for service. Again, in the U.S. that is taken very seriously -see the 'second' oath of office Obama had to take so that the exact legal wording would be correct.

Oh come now, our whole Academic world is run by Republicans, who lean left. Taking an oath should not be needed if its an old fashioned oath to a Monarchy! Why, we've evolved past that by now! and besides, she wants progress, so this is better, isn’t it?

As to lies, GIlliard is no different than John McCain. He has actually stated, on film, that if it comes to a choice between Lying and loosing, he'd lie. He's still leading in the Polls.

Democracy is the Philosophy of allowing those who have the most Charisma and money win elections by appealing to popular sentiments. In this, and only this, I agree with Howard Zinn, who said that we allow Oppression because the Rhetoric of Flag, Country, Patriotism, and Democracy are used in the speeches of our Politicians. Zinn was a Communist, but he was right in this regard. ( And seemed to ignore that Communists do the same thing.)

People will buy into it just because the words sound pretty, and McCain will win the Republican Votes regardless because he's a Republican. Its all totally daft.

Its rather like me trying to defend Loyalists on another Blog, where the idiots think the Loyalists were the same as modern Day Communist and Socialists.

This is why such deception works, and why I am a Monarchist. I don't pretend to be an expert Mechanic and then tell people how to fix their cars, and don’t think getting a group pf ten friends together to vote on it will be sensible either. What needs to be done is to find a Mechanic. Yet we don’t want a Mechanic, we want a bunch of people who don’t know much about cars to fix our car.

Then we let the mob in to fix our car without realising they often use it for smuggling and can easily cut our breaks.